Supreme Court rules DOMA unconstitutional

Well, well, well.  Hello there Inner Thoughts & Outbursts readers.  It's been quite awhile since I've last written here; I fell out of the habit of blogging and, until today, didn't feel compelled to sign in.

Today, though, things changed.  Today, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) was unconstitutional.  Today, I felt like I was witnessing an important part of history.

I've been a supporter of same-sex marriage from what I consider "the beginning" (at least, my beginning)—when my home state of Massachusetts legalized gay marriage in 2004.  (I even wrote about it for my college newspaper, but, alas, some things on the Internet aren't forever... I can't find the links.)  I have always maintained that gay rights are civil rights and that the benefits of marriage should be available to all. 

That being said, I'm also someone who is easily overwhelmed by sad or frustrating news.  I find myself having to look away when the news covers tragedy after tragedy—tsunamis, wars, bombings, misery....  And I feel my blood pressure rising when foolish politicians yammer on and on while taking away basic human rights and imposing their views upon others.  So I wasn't actively following the case to overturn DOMA; it was simply too hard on my heart to follow its ups and downs.

But this morning, I saw that a ruling was expected.  While at work, I started listening to the news and refreshing the blogs.  When the announcement was made that DOMA was ruled unconstitutional, I burst into tears at my desk.  A coworker asked if I was okay, and I was so choked up I couldn't answer for nearly a minute. 

I certainly wasn't expecting to cry.  I feel strongly about equal marriage rights and benefits for all, but I didn't expect to tear up when I heard the news.  I expected either feelings of triumph (I had those) or more blood-boiling frustration (none of that, thanks to the outcome), but not tears.  So why?  Why did I react so strongly?

I think I started to cry for two reasons.  First, I felt like the DOMA ruling was some good political news in a world that is increasingly full of political decisions and efforts that break my heart and raise my blood pressure.  Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, I felt relieved that my gay friends and family now had this one victory in their corner.  That should their partners end up in the hospital, they'll be allowed to visit.  That they won't have to pay more for their health insurance.  That when a partner dies they won't have to pay ridiculous taxes and fees, like Edith Windsor, the woman who took her case to court and won today.

As a country, we still have a long way to go.  Today's ruling doesn't "allow" same-sex marriage in the United States; it just awards federal benefits and protection to couples who have married in states where gay marriage is legal.  But, it's a start.  And my heart is happy tonight knowing that someday, I'll be able to dance at a family member's same-sex wedding without worrying about whether or not he and his partner will be treated equally by the law. 

Upward Bound needs your help: Why TRiO programs need to be fully-funded

Change.org recently posted a call to action, asking readers to contact their federal elected officials in support of TRiO programs.

TRiO programs are “federal outreach and student services programs designed to identify and provide services for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds.” In essence, these programs allow low-income and disabled students the opportunity and tools to become the first in their families to go to college.

According to Change.org, during the last grant cycle (in 2007) for TRiO’s Upward Bound (UB) program, nearly 200 Upward Bound programs lost their funding, including a disproportionate number of programs housed at historically black institutions. It is my understanding that in response to this loss, an amendment to the College Cost Reduction and Access Act (CCRAA) “provided $57 million each year for fiscal years 2008-2001” to fund UB programs that served approximately 12,000 students. Unfortunately, because the funds were put into effect immediately – and didn’t result in forward-funding like typical TRiO grants – there are no funds to account for these programs once the CCRAA’s money runs out.

Essentially, by not providing additional discretionary funds to cover the costs of these programs, the government has decided to cut the number of active Upward Bound programs from 964 to 788, serving 12,000 fewer students each year. This is in addition to the over 39,000 students who already lost services for fiscal year 2010, due to rising costs.

Why is Upward Bound so important?

For starters, Upward Bound evens the academic playing field for at-risk kids. The teenagers who participate in UB programs can be from low-income or minority families, the first in their families to go to college. Many are also homeless or living “doubled up” with friends or family. Most UB students are a combination of some or all of those things. They also live in economically-depressed areas, like rural communities with high rates of poverty and few social service programs or big cities with lots of crime and few jobs. These are kids who are unlikely to go on to college without the guidance of a program like Upward Bound.

As a former UB student, I urge you – the readers – to encourage your elected officials to support the expansion of TRiO programs and, consequently, funding for the 2011 fiscal year. Because of the Upward Bound program, I was encouraged to go to college and given the tools to do so.

I grew up in a rural, economically-depressed area, where less than half of my classmates made it through four-year college. With Upward Bound's guidance (and financial assistance) I applied to seven colleges and universities, was accepted at six, and graduated cum laude in four years with a Bachelor of Science degree in Criminal Justice and Psychology. I was the first in my family to go to and graduate from college. It was something no one else had ever been able to do. In fact, shortly after my graduation, I had to attend the funeral of a family member. At the service, my grandfather pulled me close to him and said to anyone who would listen, “That’s my granddaughter – she’s a college graduate!”

The fact that I went to and was able to graduate from college was no small feat. I didn’t know anything about college until Upward Bound came along and helped me through the process. I wouldn’t have known to take difficult courses and the SATs – kids who have college graduates for parents know those things, but why would it occur to the rest of us? That I was guided through the process and given the skills (academic and emotional) to cope with and excel in college, resulted in my becoming the first person in my family to go to college; I hope that future generations of my family will be able to pursue their dreams of higher education as well.

In addition to helping me as a high school student, Upward Bound was also able to provide me with an internship during the summer, in between semesters at college. That lead to offers of employment every summer thereafter and turned into a fulltime job upon graduation. I was eventually promoted from Office Manager to Academic Advisor, and I was given the opportunity to help guide hundreds of other kids through the college process. I also helped to educate parents, teaching them how to advocate for themselves and their children by requesting AP classes and extracurricular activities at their children’s schools. I helped raise funds to cover the gaps between a student’s financial aid packet and the cost of college. I took everything that Upward Bound taught me, turned around, and taught it to those kids coming up behind me. I know the value of what was given to me and am eager to pay my good fortune forward.

TRiO programs need to be fully-funded. The opportunity to grow up with Upward Bound and then work for the program made me who I am today. The government likes to count things, to prove that their programs are making a difference. I don’t know if you can count the individuals who went on to lead productive lives because of UB, but I’m afraid that you can count the number of people who didn’t – they’re the ones in dead-end service jobs, in prison, in rough neighborhoods, and in bad relationships, because they didn’t have access to someone who cared about them and guided them through high school and college. They didn’t have the support networks that UB students build with their classmates, teachers, and advisors. They didn’t know that anyone believed in them, and they didn’t get the chance to shine.

College should not be a privilege enjoyed only by the rich or the offspring of college graduates. TRiO programs (including Upward Bound) allow children of all backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses, and ethnicities to achieve academic success. These students grow up to give back to their communities and become productive members of society. Eliminating or level-funding TRiO programming is irresponsible and will result in a greater discrepancy between the haves and have-nots in American society.

By not funding the Upward Bound program, we are denying our children the opportunity to take charge of their education and we are most certainly depriving ourselves of a brighter future filled with teachers, doctors, lawyers, writers, social workers, businesspeople, and entrepreneurs who knew what it was like to grow up poor. These are precisely the kind of people we need to make the world a better place. They are the people who give back to their communities by mentoring the next generation of at-risk kids so that the cycle of learning and giving back continues.

Please join the cause and write to your elected officials. You can find them online through the Change.org call to action and read more about the issue at the Council for Opportunity in Education.

Some people just have a laundry list of issues...

Add this one to the list of things people argue about when they have too much time on their hands.

Perkasie, a small town in Pennsylvania, is home to less than 10,000 residents including Carin Froehlich. Yahoo! News reported today that Froehlich has had to fight for her right to hang laundry outdoors.

Neighbors have complained that they don't want to see Froehlich's laundry outside because makes the neighborhood “look like trailer trash.” A town official has even gone so far to call Froehlich to ask her to stop drying her clothes outdoors.


Froehlich argues that it's an American right to dry clothes outdoors, wryly noting that if her husband has a right to bear arms, she has a right to hang laundry. Besides, Froehlich, like many others who hang laundry outdoors, talks about the savings, since line-drying clothes lowers the family's electric bill.

Perhaps even more surprising is the fact that there is a non-profit organization dedicated to making air-drying laundry an “acceptable and desirable” practice. Project Laundry List doesn't merely believe that that Americans have a right to line-dry their laundry, but also touts the environmental benefits of line-drying and cold-water washing.

According to Project Laundry List's sample letters to elected officials, “clothes dryers use an estimated 6 to 10 % of residential electricity use. The average family can save over $85/year by using a clothesline instead of a dryer.”

The take of this Inner Thoughts & Outbursts writer? Hanging clothes outdoors makes sense. There's no reason people shouldn't be allowed to hang their clothes (even their undies!) to line-dry instead of using a dryer. While I personally prefer my dryer (I have allergies that make line-drying more of a hassle than a help), I certainly appreciate the environmental benefits of line-drying. Of course, the bottom line isn't that line-drying saves people money or that it's good for the environment; the bottom line is that people should butt out of their neighbors' business! Clean laundry blowing in the breeze is a nod to a bygone era, not a malicious eyesore. This writer says, “get over it!”

Too cool for school? President Obama's plan to address students

Yahoo! News reported today that President Obama's national address to the students of America is under fire by conservatives who believe that the president is promoting a leftist agenda. The article goes as far to say that some conservatives are "calling the speech an excuse to brainwash American children."

At noon on September 8, the address will be broadcast live on the White House website and C-SPAN. According to the press release, President Obama intends to speak directly to students about succeeding in school. He will challenge them to "work hard, set educational goals, and take responsibility for their learning."

Image courtesy of AP Photo/Charles Dharapak.

Oh no! The President of the United States of America (elected by a solid 53% of the population) is encouraging children to embrace education? What's next? Socialism? The brainwashing, good-for-nothing monster shouldn't be allowed near our children!

Seriously though, sparking a national conversation about education is exactly what this country needs, and America's young people could use a little encouragement to take their education seriously. Our nation's children are far from mindless. It is highly unlikely that President Obama (or any U.S. President, for that matter) would be able to "brainwash" any students or even sway them to unwillingly support a "leftist" agenda.

Just moments ago, presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters, "I think we've reached a little bit of the silly season when the president of the United States can't tell kids in school to study hard and stay in school. I think both political parties agree that the dropout rate is something that threatens our long-term economic success."

My point exactly. Our children need encouragement to pursue an education, and they need to hear about the importance of education from a variety of sources, including parents, friends, teachers, and people in positions of authority. In addition, since many of our nation's failing students are from low-income or minority communities, hearing from successful men of color does nothing but good, in my opinion.

I even think that this speech is an opportunity to teach children critical thinking skills. If a teacher or parent doesn't agree with what President Obama says in the address, why not ask the students questions that require critical thinking skills? Why do you agree or disagree with the President? What improvements would you make to the education system as it is now? What is the most important factor contributing to your success in school? What is the hardest obstacle getting in the way of your education? Failing to allow our children to develop critical thinking skills is failing as parents and teachers.

We need to expose our kids to healthy, appropriate situations in which they will have the opportunity to think for themselves. We need to stop being a country full of helicopter parents and politicians who enjoy nothing more than standing on soapboxes. What we need, is to stop and listen to the President on Tuesday at noontime. Give the man a chance to say what he has to say; then, form your opinions and find a young person with whom to talk about your reactions.

Teaching old dogs new tricks: inmates train service dogs

What makes people do the things they do? What makes some people commit crimes, while others walk a straight and narrow path? How can we reform former law-breakers into law-abiding members of society?

To find the answers to my questions, I studied criminal justice and psychology in college. I was interested in the "human condition" and I wanted to find out as much as I could about what makes people behave a certain way. I focused a great deal on juveniles as well, trying to figure out what it takes to keep young people out of the criminal justice system and what could be done to help them find a place back in the community if they had already been part of the system.

Fast forward to a few things that I've learned:

1. Children do not misbehave, they make mistakes.
   When very young children act out they need something (such as attention) that they can't ask for outright. When adolescents act out, they're also seeking attention or gratification that they can't find elsewhere. Even if they "know better" they're still just kids without fully-formed brains; adolescents do not have very good impulse control and need to be taught how to deal with their feelings and needs in a productive way.
   
   
2. Nothing good can come from locking folks up and "throwing away the key."
   Very few offenders in the grand scheme find themselves behind bars forever. Because of this, our communities need to find a way to rehabilitate inmates so that they can rejoin society and become functional members of their communities. Teaching inmates about self-esteem along with technical skills will produce people who are ready to become part of the outside world again. Without this support and rehabilitation, many former inmates fall back into old patterns and wind up within the prison system once again.
   
   
3. People are inherently good.
   There are plenty of people in this world that don't get along with one another, but all of them have some good somewhere. Many inmates are poor and are dealing with mental illness or addiction. By bringing out the good in them, finding them the proper treatment for whatever illness or addiction they are battling, we can also showcase the good in people, allowing inmates to reintegrate into society after they've served their time.

It is obvious that I am a firm believer in a rehabilitative form of justice. I believe that inmates should have access to counseling services, education, and spiritual guidance. I also believe that there are many programs (or potential programs) that can benefit both inmate and society. One such program that I've been seeing more and more of lately is Puppies Behind Bars (and similar programs).

Puppies Behind Bars.
Photo courtesy of Radhika Chalasani/Redux.

Puppies Behind Bars is the brainchild of Gloria Gilbert Stoga. After adopting a Labrador Retriever who was trained as a guide dog but discharged from the program for medical reasons, Stoga began researching the process of training a guide dog. It commonly costs $25,000 to train one dog, who then goes on to be a service animal for a blind, deaf, or physically handicapped owner or assists law enforcement as a drug- or explosives-sniffing dog. When a friend of Stoga's commented that prisoners might make good dog trainers, and idea was born.

Puppies Behind Bars operates in a handful of prisons across the country. Dogs have been trained by both men and women inmates, and there are successful programs for juvenile offenders as well. Puppies live in cells with their trainers and receive weekend furloughs to outside homes to experience life outside prison walls (to get used to traffic, doorbells, telephones, elevators, and the like). Trainers attend weekly classes and train their dogs in obedience as well as the special skills required to be a guide dog or law enforcement dog.

I support the programming of Puppies Behind Bars one hundred percent. Research shows that dogs have a calming, positive affect on people (inmates included). It also shows that the inmate trainers who work with these dogs finish the program with higher self esteem, more compassion for other people, better impulse control, and a drop in selfishness. They've also learned valuable skills that can help them when they reintegrate into society. These inmates can find work with animals, or -- with their new-found patience -- can train for other types of work.

In addition to benefits for the inmates, training dogs behind bars has advantages for the dogs and the community as well. For starters, the dogs involved in the program find themselves with devoted care 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Prisoners do not have demands on their time the way those outside the system do. Even the most devoted dog trainers in the "outside" world have the distractions of spouses, cell phones, children, dentist appointments, and the like. In prison, dogs have access to their trainers -- and undivided attention -- 24 hours a day. The community benefits as well, since training a dog through a program like Puppies Behind Bars costs less than it does in the "real" world. More dogs can be trained less expensively, which means that more service animals are out in the community, assisting people who need them.

For more information on Puppies Behind Bars, you may visit them online at: http://www.puppiesbehindbars.com/index.asp

Denied a diploma for blowing a kiss?

Earlier this month the ABC-affiliate from Portland, Maine reported that high school student Justin Denney was denied his diploma after "misbehaving" during his graduation ceremony. Denney's misbehavior? Blowing his family a kiss and bowing on stage.

The "proud gestures" were enough for superintendent Suzanne Lukas to deny Denney his diploma, saying that the boy's actions violated a code of conduct signed by the graduating students. After a public uproar over the situation, the school board met to discuss the decision. It is reported that the school board supported the superintendent's actions, though they did mail Denney his diploma.

According to ABC, Denney and his family have asked for an apology and for the superintendent to step down, but the superintendent defends her actions and states that "this is a closed issue" as far as she is concerned.



Having watched video of the graduation in question (not the video above), I understand why school officials instituted a policy to maintain order during the graduation ceremony. Students were batting around beach balls and acting up during various points during the ceremony, which was obviously distracting to families, as well as the students who were not participating in the shenanigans. School officials said that graduations had been quite rowdy in the past, which is why strict standards were implemented.

What concerns me is the obvious difference between disrespectful teenagers bashing each other with beach balls, and a student blowing his family a kiss after four years of hard work. Denney wasn't showboating. He didn't yell and do cartwheels on the stage; he merely showed excitement at his accomplishment. He wasn't misbehaving, he was being a kid!

The fact that a superintendent and school board would stand behind their misguided decision to deny a student his diploma is even more appalling. An apology is certainly called for. Denney was denied the opportunity to graduate with his class -- he'll never again have the opportunity to relive that moment. In addition, Superintendent Lukas was completely out of line. If she was worried about misbehavior, she should have paid more attention to the catcalls and beach balls in the audience and less attention to a student celebrating his achievement.

I was initially shocked when I heard this story, but the shock quickly wore off, since I hear stories like this far too often. We live in a society of excess. On one hand there are children being allowed to throw beach balls to interrupt a graduation ceremony, and on the other there are school officials punishing a minor offender (if it can be classified as offensive at all). Children shouldn't be allowed to throw beach balls during graduation, but who's to blame for that? Where are the parents teaching manners about social decorum? Where are the teachers who tell the kids how proud they are and explain how to act during the ceremony? Perhaps if we taught our children about socially-acceptable displays of exuberance and affection, we wouldn't be dealing with overly-excitable kids and an overly-uptight superintendent, with one boy singled out as an scapegoat.

Mighty Michelle

Ivy-league educated. Healthy and in-shape. Style icon. In a loving relationship. Mother of two beautiful girls. On the cover of dozens of magazines one month and in Europe the next. This poised has-it-all-together woman? None other than Michelle Obama, First Lady of the United States of America.

Michelle Obama has impressed me from the very beginning. Politics aside, she’s the kind of person I’d like to have cupcakes and tea with. She just seems like a fun person. She’s the epitome of who I want to see in the White House – graceful, eloquent, and educated, but also realistic, funny, and down-to-earth. She seems equally capable of mingling with foreign dignitaries and joining my family for a barbeque. She also seems as comfortable talking about sociology as she does fashion.

Speaking of fashion, I am enamored with many of the First Lady’s choices. I didn’t grow up watching Jackie O, but I can imagine what it was like. While female pop stars are running around in ripped leggings with diamond-encrusted tops and “it” bags, Michelle is wearing (comparatively) reasonably priced items from White House Black Market and J. Crew.

Make no mistake, Michelle is no frivolous fashionista; there are brains to back up that beauty. A graduate of Princeton University and Harvard Law School, Michelle had several high-profile, intellectual jobs before campaigning for her husband. She’s smart and snappy and an asset to diplomatic relations. On her recent European tour, she seemed equally comfortable with Queen Elizabeth and French school children, and according to a CNN poll, eighty percent of Americans thought that the First Lady strengthened the U.S. image abroad.

All in all, I’ve never really been one to idolize celebrities, but I do respect the life-in-the-limelight that Michelle Obama is living. I love that she’s so classy and yet, so approachable. If I were ever inspired to write a letter to the White House, it’s likely that it would be addressed to Michelle Obama. She gives me hope that her husband’s administration will bring about the promised change, and will look good and sound smart doing it.

Here’s to change, and to Michelle Obama.